Beeswax mimetic substances and methods of operating beehives

ABSTRACT

A beeswax mimetic substance is described which comprises or consists essentially of a synthetic or semisynthetic wax, in particular a microcrystalline wax. The wax preferably has a relatively narrow range of mean carbon chain length. An apiculture accessory using the wax and a method of operating beehives using the wax to reduce disease and pests in beehives is described.

The present invention relates to apiculture components such as honeycombfoundations, artificial honeycombs, beehive covers, beehive bottomboards, beehive queen excluders, beehive queen cages, beehive cell cupsand any other elements and surfaces which are used in a beehive andwhich are accessible to the bees. The present invention also relates toa method of operating a beehive.

TECHNICAL BACKGROUND

Bees, like all other living things, are subject to disease, pests andparasites. In the commercial production of honey it is necessary tomaintain the health of the bee colonies in order to maintain productionand also to provide honey of high quality. In relation to the treatmentof bee diseases, nowadays fat soluble substances are used, resulting inan increased accumulation of residues in industrially sold beeswax. Asthe beekeepers are gathering and using the melted wax again and again,from one year to the next, the problem is aggravating every season.Furthermore, pathogens can be spread by using bee wax coming from abroadwhich has been demonstrated for Paenibacillus larvae, causing AmericanFoulbrood disease in honeybee colonies.

Bee colonies which are infested by the mite Varroa Jacobsoni areinevitably killed unless the beekeeper takes measures against them. Onemethod of control is by spraying, dusting or fumigating with acaricidesin the beehive and an effectiveness of 80 to 90% has been reported. Inorder to increase the effectiveness even further, DE-A-341 7674 suggeststhe introduction of the acaricide into the wax foundation which will bedrawn by the bees into a final honeycomb. One problem with thistechnique is that is common to reuse bees wax from one year to the nextand therefore that the levels of chemicals such as insecticides,fungicides and antibiotics in tho wax may increase with time. There isthe danger that chemicals used to ward off insects may find their wayinto the honey and into the human food chain as well as into beeswaxcandles. Further, the prolonged exposure of insects, bacteria and fungito insecticides, fungicides and antibiotics has the effect of selectingand favouring those insects, bacteria and fungi which become resistantby mutation. It is now well understood that the increasing prophylacticuse of insecticides, fungicides and antibiotics is accompanied by anincreasing resistance to these chemicals so that the pharmaceuticalindustry is perpetually in a neck-on-neck race with the developingresistance. This has resulted in very conservative treatment strategieswhen powerful insecticides, fungicides or antibiotics are involved,However, when such chemicals arc used only when there is definiteevidence of infection or infestation, there is always the possibilitythat there is not a 100% eradication of the pest or disease. This meansthat these pests and diseases may be carried forward to the next yearsbee colonies. There has been a need for a solution to this problem withbeeswax for some time.

The success of a bee colony argues for cohesion of individuals in socialactivity: as few as 50 bees will form a cluster, with or without aqueen, and the same number is sufficient for comb construction. Thecluster provides a mechanism for the regulation of the nest temperatureand much of the colony's behaviour is mediated through a large series ofchemical and tactile interactions. The combs are the result of stimuliacting on the bees and also provide direct stimuli to the beesthemselves. The beeswax is first elaborated (mandibulated) and modifiedto form a comb wax of reasonable stiffness, strength and flexibility.The working properties of the wax and its end-use are finely tuned tothe thermal conditions of the nest. One problem in commercially operatedbeehives is the mechanical stability of man-made beeswax foundationswhich are drawn into the final honeycombs by the bees. When the beehivetemperature approaches the melting point of beeswax (about 62° C.) themechanical properties of the beeswax reduce which can result in saggingor collapse of the honeycomb. Various attempts have been made to use amore stabile core to the foundations such as paper, aluminium or plasticonto which a thin layer of beeswax is applied. For instance, the beeswaxmay be applied to a wire mesh, a glass fibre mat (DE-A-4011168) or afibre board (U.S. Pat. No. 1,672,853). One reason why artificialhoneycomb foundations are provided is that energy generated from theavailable food can be diverted into honey production rather than intobeeswax production. Hence, the bees honey production is increased.Despite these attempts to use artificial and natural materials inbeehives, foundations still usually consist of a thin plate of beeswaxwhich is mounted on a wooden frame and supported by metal wires. On bothsides punched or moulded hexagonal depressions serve as starting pointsfor the formation of honeycomb cells drawn out by the bees. Onedisadvantage with introducing hard materials into the core offoundations is that the bees often reposition the wax both on onefoundation as well as between foundations. This means that whensufficient bees wax has been removed by the bees the underlying hardmaterial is exposed and strips of beeswax may come free.

Attempts have been made to use plastic materials for foundations. Forinstance, U.S. Pat. No. 1,282,645 describes the use of baekelite as afoundation. However, it is not clear from the historical records whethercombs were ever successfully drawn on the backelite material. As far asit is known, a beeswax coating was used over the baekelite but the odourof carbolic acid was not masked completely by the wax and when the beesgnawed through the wax they were repelled. FR-A-1035428 discloses theuse of microcrystalline waxes in a foundation but the composition is notrecorded as showing mimetic properties. More recently, in U.S. Pat. No.4,992,073, the use of a mixture of 7.5 to 15% weight of beeswax and apolypropylene copolymer has been proposed. Due to the fact that beeswaxis included in this mixture, this is not a completely syntheticfoundation and the reuse of contaminated beeswax cannot be eliminated bythis known procedure. A similar problem occurs with the beeswax mixtureproposed in U.S. Pat. No. 1,582,605 in which a foundation is proposedmade from blended vegetable wax and beeswax whereby the outer layer ispreferably beeswax. A suitable vegetable wax is considered to becarnauba wax and a satisfactory mixture is said to be 30% carnauba waxand 70% pure bees wax Despite the many proposals for synthetic orpartially synthetic foundations, a completely satisfactory result hasnot been obtained and foundation manufacture is nowadays still verysimilar to that of one hundred years ago. The foundations may tot be toothick or too hard or the bees will not accept them. However, thinfoundations must be structurally sound and able to carry the load of thefully drawn comb full of honey at temperatures experienced inside abeehive, e.g. 35-37° C. Any materials used must also be of relativelylow price to remain economically viable. Additional thermal andmechanical loadings may be placed upon the foundation during honeyextraction and post-extraction sterilising processes which are usuallycarried out at such a high temperature that they melt and remove anybeeswax which bas been applied to the underlying structure. This meansthat any inner foundation support (e.g. wire) has to be recoated withbeeswax which increases the costs of the final foundation. Last but notleast, the bees must also accept the material used in the foundation.

One further aspect of life in a bee-hive influences the choice ofsuitable materials. It is believed that communication within the hive iscarried out by chemical substances which form a “chemical language”.Pheromones are one group of such chemicals which are sometimes called“social chemicals”. Within the beehive these chemicals may betransmitted by contact, i.e. they may be rubbed off the bees ontobeeswax and other bees and transported around the hive. Any materialwithin a beehive must support this language. Any foreign materials mustnot block, mask or modify any of these chemical messengers otherwiseimportant commands within the language my be distorted or eliminated.

In the literature reference can often be found to so-called “beeswaxsubstitutes”. These materials are used in chemical formulations such ascosmetic or pharmaceutical products as a replacement for naturalbeeswax, These beeswax substitutes have nothing to do with materialsused in beehives as described in the present invention nor in apiculturein general. Webster's New International Dictionary defines the word“mimetic” as “characterised by or exhibiting biological mimicry”.

Waxes derived from petroleum am well known and include hydrocarbons ofthree types: paraffin, semi-microcrystalline, and microcrystalline. Thequality and quantity of the wax separated from the crude oil depend onthe source of the crude oil and the degree of refining to which it hasbeen subjected prior to wax separation. Paraffin, semi-microcrystalline,and microcrystalline waxes may be differentiated using the refractiveindex of the wax and its congealing point as determined by ASTM D 938 orDIN ISO 2207. In addition, petroleum waxes can be distinguished by theirviscosities. For example, semi-microcrystalline wax has a kineticviscosity at 98.9° C. of less than 10 mm²/s (=cSt), whilemicrocrystalline wax has a kinetic viscosity at 98.9° C. of greater thanor equal to 10 mm²/s (=cSt).

Microcrystalline wax usually contains substantial portions ofhydrocarbons other than normal alkanes. It is usually obtained from thehighest boiling fraction of a crude oil. Microcrystalline waxes displayboth chemical and physical properties quite different from paraffin waxAt similar melting points, the microcrystallines have a much highermolecular weight than the paraffins. Microcrystalline waxes have a verydelicate crystalline structure, the crystals of which may be of a fineneedle or short plate type.

In the manufacture of conventional microcrystalline waxes, the bottomsstream from a vacuum tower or “bright stock” is deasphalted to produce aheavy deasphalted oil which is then extracted to partially removearomatics. Hydrocarbonaceous feeds from which underwaxed bright stocksmay be obtained usually contain aromatic compounds as well as normal andbranched paraffins of very long chain lengths. These feeds usually boilin the gas oil range. Typical feedstocks are vacuum gas oils with normalboiling ranges above about 350° C. and below about 600° C., anddeasphalted residual oils having normal boiling ranges above about 480°C. and below about 650° C. Reduced topped crude oils, shale oils,liquefied coal, coal, coke distillates, flask or thermally cracked oils,atmospheric residua, and other heavy oils can also be used as the feedsource. Other sources may be the mineral ozocerite or lignite.

Typically, the hydrocarbonaceous feed is distilled at atmosphericpressure to produce a reduced crude (residuum) which is then vacuumdistilled to produce a distillate fraction and a residue fraction. Thevacuum residuum fraction may then be hydrocracked using standardreaction conditions and catalysts in one or more reaction zones. Ingeneral, refineries process at least one distillate fraction and oneresiduum fraction to produce several base stocks. Typically, severaldistillate factions and the residuum of a vacuum distillation operationare refined. These fractions have acquired various names in the refiningart. In particular, the residuum fraction is commonly referred to as“bright stock”.

The term “microcrystalline wax” generally refers to deoiled (to lessthan about 5 wt % oil) wax having a melting point varying from about140° F. to 180° F. which is recovered from this deasphalted, extractedoil by dewaxing and deoiling. The wax obtained by such a process ischaracterised by a poor odour, a dark colour and it contains aromaticimpurities as shown by ultraviolet absorption tests. Thus, the wax mustbe further refined in order to yield useful products. For example,microcrystalline wax may be contacted with solid absorbent materialssuch as bauxite or clay to absorb the aromatic compounds therefrom whichimpart unfavourable properties to the wax.

Various improvements in the refining of microcrystalline waxes have beenmade over the years. The most notable of these processes have beendirected towards catalytic refining of the wax in the presence ofhydrogen, also known as hydrofining. For example, U.S. Pat. No.3,052,622 discloses taking a crude oil residua and simultaneouslydeasphalting and extracting the aromatics from it via the Duo-Solprocess to obtain a waxy petroleum residue which is then hydrofined bypassing the wax, in the presence of hydrogen, over a catalyst of nickeloxide on bauxite. The hydrofined product is then dewaxed via aconventional solvent dewaxing process using toluene and MEK as thedewaxing solvent.

To produce a refined wax that meets U.S. Food and Drug Administration(FDA) standards, the produced waxes may be further refined by contactingwith a solid absorbent and then acid treated to achieve the necessaryFDA colour, odour, and colour stability requirements. For instance, aprocess for producing high quality, high molecular weightmicrocrystalline wax from hydrocracked underwaxed bright stock is knownfrom U.S. Pat. No. 4,608,151. The process comprises three steps. In thefirst step, a hydrocracked underwaxed bright stock is hydrodenitrifiedusing, for example, a sulphided nickel-tin or nickel-molybdenumhydrotreating catalyst having a siliceous or alumina matrix. In thesecond step, the bright stock, having a reduced catalyst poison content,is hydrofinished using, for example, an unsulphided nickel-tin orpalladium hydrotreating catalyst having a siliceous or alumina matrix.In the third step, the waxy oil is solvent dewaxed using a conventionaldewaxing solvent such as a mixture of methyl-ethyl-ketone (MEK) andtoluene. It has been found that this three-step process produces a highquality, high molecular weight microcrystalline wax.

It is an object of the present invention to provide accessories forbeehives such as honeycomb foundations, artificial honeycombs, beehivecovers beehive bottom boars, beehive queen excluders, beehive queencages and beehive cell cups, which reduce the risk of transfer ofdiseases and pests from one year to the next.

Further, it is an object of the present invention to provide beehiveaccessories such as honeycomb foundations, artificial honeycombs,beehive covers, beehive bottom boards, beehive queen excluders, beehivequeen cages, beehive cell cups which do not contain natural beeswax anwhich are lower in cost than previously known beehive accessories.

It is a further object of the present invention to provide beehiveaccessories such as honeycomb foundations, artificial honeycombs,beehive covers, beehive bottom boards, beehive queen excluders, beehivequeen cages, beehive cell cups which are acceptable to the bees and areadequate for the thermal and mechanical loads on the beehive accessoriesduring operation of the beehive colony as well as during ancillaryprocesses such as honey extraction.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention includes the use of a synthetic or semi-syntheticbeeswax mimetic substance in an apiculture accessory, the mimeticsubstance being of a type which bees mandibulate interchangeably withbeeswax.

The present invention may provide an apiculture accessory for use in abeehive, the accessory comprising a beeswax mimetic substance, themimetic substance being of a type which bees mandibulate interchangeablywith beeswax. The bees wax mimetic substance may be synthetic orsemisynthetic and may comprise or consist essentially of amicrocrystalline wax.

The present invention may also provide an apiculture accessory wherein avirgin surface of the accessory exposed to the bees comprises asemi-synthetic or synthetic mimetic substance, in particular amicrocrystalline wax.

The present invention includes the method of reducing pests, disease orparasites in a beehive including at least one apiculture accessorycomprising beeswax or a beeswax mimetic substance, the method comprisingthe step of: replacing the one apiculture accessory from time to timewith the same accessory made from virgin beeswax mimetic substance, themimetic substance being of a type which bees mandibulate interchangeablywith beeswax. Preferably, the apiculture accessories in accordance withthe present invention are replaced with virgin ones after any beedisease or infestation and/or after a certain period, e.g. at yearlyintervals.

Any apiculture accessory in accordance with the present invention mayinclude, for instance, any kind of suitable reinforcement, e.g. a wireframe or mesh, about which the beeswax mimetic substance is placed, forexample by moulding. The beeswax mimetic substance may be applied, forinstance, to any kind of sheet of material useful in a beehive such aswire mesh, plastic, paper, fibre or cardboard sheet. The apicultureaccessories in accordance with the present invention may be, forexample, artificial honeycombs, honeycomb foundations, beehive covers,beehive bottom boards, beehive queen excluders, beehive queen cages orbeehive cell cups.

Mimetic substances in accordance with the present invention may compriseor consist essentially of microcrystalline waxes which are preferablypure white waxes. Mimetic substances in accordance with the presentinvention may comprise or consist essentially of unbranched (normal-) orbranched (iso-) hydrocarbons or mixtures of the two. The mimeticsubstances in accordance with the present invention may also includesaturated and do not necessarily exclude unsaturated hydrocarbons,however, the preferred manufacturing method will remove substantiallyall unsaturated hydrocarbons. These could be added separately, however,at a later stage. A beeswax mimetic substance in accordance with thepresent invention may be a homologous series of hydrocarbons. Apreferred mimetic substance in accordance with the present invention isa microcrystalline wax which preferably has an ozokcrite structure. Themajority of the molecules (greater 98%) of a microcrystalline wax inaccordance with the present invention suitable for mid-European climatesand for the bee apis mellifora carnica preferably have an equivalenthydrocarbon molecular chain length range as determined by hightemperature capillary gas chromatography of 20 to 55. The most commonequivalent chain lengths preferably lie in a range 28 to 36. The medianequivalent chain length is preferably 31±4, more preferably 31±2. Themean equivalent chain length is preferably 33±4, more preferably 33±3,and most preferably 33±2. These values are specifically useful forbeehives used in mid-European climates. The present invention includesmodifications to these values, either up or down, to accommodatedifferent ambient temperature conditions, e.g. as may be experienced inthe tropics or in countries closer to the poles, or as may be requiredto match the beeswax of other varieties of bees. The distribution ofequivalent hydrocarbon chain lengths in the preferred microcrystallinewax in accordance with the present invention for mid-European climatesas determined by high temperature capillary gas chromatography may berepresented approximately by a Poisson distribution or a combination ofPoisson distributions but the present invention includes distributionsanywhere between Gaussian and triangular. The mean equivalenthydrocarbon chain length is preferably between C30 and C38, or morepreferably with between C30.5 and C36.5 in which the standard deviationof the distribution is between 3.5 and 6.5 carbon atoms.

A food-grade material in accordance with the present invention is amaterial suitable for inclusion in food for human consumption, e.g. asspecified in the Food Chemical Codex, National Academy Press, 1996 or bythe U.S. Food and Drug Administration. It is preferred if themicrocrystalline wax used as the beeswax mimic is a refinedmicrocrystalline wax which meets the cleanliness and purity requirementsnecessary for use in foods.

The dependent claims define individual embodiments of the presentinvention. The present invention will now be described with reference tothe following drawings.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is an analysis of beeswax produced by different bees.

FIG. 2 shows the results of gas chromatography for test materials.

FIG. 3 is a graph showing the results of gas chromatography on a beeswaxmimetic substance in accordance with an embodiment of the presentinvention.

FIG. 4 shows the results of gas chromatography on two wax samples whichwere not very suitable as a beeswax mimetic substance.

FIG. 5 shows a sample trace from a gas chromatographic of a beeswaxmimetic substance in accordance with an embodiment of the presentinvention.

FIGS. 6A to C shows the results of gas chromatography on a beeswaxmimetic substance in accordance with one embodiment of the presentinvention.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

The present invention will be described with reference to certainembodiments and drawings but the present invention is not limitedthereto but only by the claims.

The present invention relates to a material which is accepted by bees asa replacement or substitute for, or an imitation of beeswax. In order todistinguish over so-called beeswax substitutes which are used inchemical, pharmaceutical and cosmetic formulations and which are remotefrom the applications in accordance with the present invention, amaterial which is mandibulated and worked by bees indistinguishably fromand exchangeably with beeswax and which supports the bees' chemicallanguage will be called a “beeswax mimetic substance” or a “beeswaxmimic”. The term “mimetic” as used in this invention means that the beeswork with the substance as if it were beeswax and, when both materialsare present in the beehive, for example as part of a foundation, thebees make no significant difference between the two. This means that abeeswax mimetic substance is used interchangeably by the bees, a damagedportion of a piece of mimetic waxy material or beeswax being repaired,for instance, by either some of the mimetic waxy material or somebeeswax or a mixture of the two. In effect the bees experience (see,feel or any other sensory function) the beeswax mimetic substance as ifit were beeswax as far as this subjective characteristic of the mimeticsubstance can be determined by objective observation of the behaviour ofthe bees. Mimetic substances in accordance with any embodiment of thepresent invention may be described as behavioural beeswax mimeticsubstances.

Further, to function as a successful beeswax mimetic material it shouldbe mixable with, and have the consistency of, natural beeswax. Hence, amaterial as described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,992,073 is not a beeswaxmimetic substance in accordance with the present invention as thepolymer/beeswax mixture is a hard, intractable material. Due to the factthat the bees use their mandibles to work the wax and that these organsare very sensitive, bees appear to be able to detect fine grades of waxhardness in dependence upon temperature, crystal size and “feel” of anywax. In addition it is believed that bees secrete chemicals which theyuse to work and mould the natural beeswax. Hence any beeswax mimeticsubstance should preferably behave similarly with respect to thesesecretions. The present inventors do not know of any previous successfulsynthetic beeswax mimetic materials although a large number of syntheticmaterials have been tried in beehives in the past.

Beeswax from various bees has been examined by gas-liquid chromatographyFIG. 1 (Tulloch 1980). Variations in the chain lengths of the majorcomponents can be seen. Further, there are differences between beeswaxesfrom different types of bees. One bee type, A. mellifera has beenanalysed chemically in detail—see Table 1.

TABLE 1 Chemical analysis of beeswax (Tulloch 1980) Number of componentsin fractions Constituent fractions % Major Minor Hydrocarbons 14 10 66Monoesters 35 10 10 Diesters 14 6 24 Triesters 3 5 20 Hydroxy monoesters4 6 20 Hydroxy polyesters 8 5 20 Acid esters 1 7 20 Acid polyesters 2 520 Free acids 12 8 10 Free alcohols 1 5 ? Unidentified 6 7 ? TOTAL 10074 210 

Table 2 gives further information with respect to the major componentsof this beeswax as determined by the same author.

TABLE 2 Major components of beeswax Component Chain length and %saturated hydrocarbons C27 (4%), C29 (2%), C31 (1%) saturatedhydrocarbons C31:1 (1%), C33:1 (2.5%) saturated monoesters C40 (6%), C42(3%), C44 (3%), C46 (8%), C48 (6%) unsaturated monoesters C46:1 (2%),C48:1 (2%) diesters C56 (2%), C58 (2%), C60 (2%), C62 (3%), C64 (1%)hydroxy esters C46 (1%) fatty acids C24 (6%), C26 (1%), C28 (1%)

What is noticeable about table 1 is that beeswax is a complex naturalsubstance including over 280 individual components. The largest groupincludes various types of esters. From tables 1 and 2 there is no clearpicture as how a beeswax mimetic substance could be produced other thanby a commercially unrealistic attempt at complete synthesis.

The present invention is based on the very surprising realisation thatit is possible to produce a waxy material relatively economically whichhas the mechanical and thermal properties which allow foundations to bemade therefrom, which the bees readily draw into satisfactoryhoneycombs, while providing, a honeycomb having sufficient strength sothat there is no sagging. It is anticipated that once the skilled personappreciates the elements of the present invention, that other waxymaterials may be found which exhibit the required thermo-mechanical and(bio-)chemical properties. In accordance with the present invention theproblem of pest and disease transfer from one year to another may beavoided by remaking and replacing at least some of the apiculturecomponents of the beehive at regular time intervals, e.g. each year,from a hygienic, low priced, food-grade beeswax mimetic substance. Thisis a major advance as it avoids the traditional dependence on naturalbeeswax and therefore breaks the chain of disease and pest transfer fromone year to the next, from one hive to another or from one country toanother. In particular the availability of a low price beeswax mimicallows the redesign of traditional beehives so that structures which mayharbour diseases and pests are removed each year and replaced withpristine components.

The terms “synthetic” or “semi-synthetic” as used in the presentinvention include waxes derived from natural sources, e.g. crude oils,which have gone through an extensive industrial process of refinement sothat the final product can no longer be described as “natural”. Thesynthetic or semi-synthetic materials described with reference to thepresent invention are therefore different from natural beeswaxconventionally used in making apiculture accessories. Such beeswax maybe “refined” or purified to remove debris before use but the finalmaterial is still substantially the same as the natural startingmaterial.

A beeswax mimetic substance in accordance with an embodiment of thepresent invention at least suitable for use in mid-European climates andfor the apis mellifora carnica bee includes a refined microcrystallinewax preferably having the properties in Table 3. A preferredmicrocrystalline wax at least for mid-European climates and for the beeapis mellifora carnica is commercially available under the trade nameApicera ™ and is available from Paramelt, Heerhugowaard, Holland. It isassumed that the same material may find advantageous use as a beeswaxmimetic substance at least in temperate zones throughout the world. Whenmicrocrystalline waxes having all the desired properties are notavailable, it is included within the scope of the present invention touse mixtures of microcrystalline waxes. By modifying the relativeproportions of two or more microcrystalline waxes it is possible toprepare a wax having the optimum combination of properties.

TABLE 3 Value remarks/ Test mean value design tolerance ± test methodcongealing point 70° C. 2° C. ASTM D 938 penetration 16 2 ASTM D 1321melting point 75 ° C. 3 ° C. ASTM D 3945 refractive index 1.433 0.002equivalent C33 4, more preferably determined by high hydrocarbon chain3, most preferably temperature capillary length 2 carbon atoms gaschroma- tography dynamic viscosity at 6.5 mPa · s 1 DIN 52007-2 98.9° C.

Several different batches of Apicera™ were used to prepare wiresupported foundations in accordance with conventional methods, e.g.moulding. No difficulty was experienced in moulding foundations usingequipment usually used for moulding foundations using beeswax. It is notanticipated that there is any limitation on the present invention withrespect to the design of the foundations Any conventional design may beused, hence the present invention is not limited to wired foundations.Also, the present invention is not limited to foundations. The beeswaxmimetic substances of the present invention may be used to formhalf-cell or full-cell combs. However, due to the cost and extradifficulty of producing such fragile structures they are not preferred.

The wired foundations made using Apicera™ wax were introduced intobeehives in frames. Either all the frames were made with the syntheticwax or some were introduced alongside foundations made with beeswax. Thebees populating the hives were apis mellifora carnica. In all cases thesynthetic foundations were drawn out to normal, healthy, functioninghoneycombs with hexagonal cells. Larval development, pollen storage andproduction of honey was studied over a two year period. No differencecould be found between the honeycombs drawn from natural beeswax andthose from the synthetic mimic. Further, all other aspects werecompletely normal and the honey was of identical quality. No evidencecould be found that the bees' chemical language was disturbed in anyway, in any stage of the formation of a hive, e.g. during queening,raising of the brood, etc. It was also noticed that the bees used thesynthetic mimetic substance or the beeswax indiscriminately indicatingthat the synthetic material really acted as a mimic, i.e. the bees couldsense no difference. Further, honey was extracted by normal and all thehoneycombs behaved in the same way indicating that the combs drawn fromthe synthetic mimetic substance were of equal strength. The honeyextracted was examined by high temperature capillary gas chromatographyto determine if any of the synthetic wax was removed by the honeyextraction process. No indications of hydrocarbons from the wax could bedetected in the extracted honey. Despite this it is preferred if thesynthetic wax used for the foundations is food grade quality so that ifany wax does get accidentally Included in the honey, there is no loss ofquality of the honey.

One major advantage of the microcrystalline beeswax mimetic substance inaccordance with the above embodiment of the present invention has beenfound to be that it has a low microbiological loading in its normalform. Hence, foundation produced with the wax using normal manufacturingconditions does not introduce known bee pathogens into a hive. This isin contrast to natural beeswax, e.g. that obtained from abroad tosupplement indigenous supplies of beeswax.

In addition to the above experiments two further microcrystalline waxeswere tested in identical foundations and in an identical way to thefoundations according to the present invention as described above.Neither of these waxes performed well in the hives. The waxes werechosen so that their molecular weight distributions were a little lowerand a little higher than that of Apicera™ wax. All the samples wereanalysed by high temperature capillary as chromatography. The equipmentwas first calibrated using a range of hydrocarbons of known carbon chainlength. The output of the gas chromatograph is shown graphically in FIG.2. It shows several discrete lines each one of which corresponds to oneof the known hydrocarbons in the mixture. Then samples 1 to 7 wereanalysed in the same equipment. The results are summarised in Table 4and shown graphically in FIG. 3 for samples 1 to 4 of mimetic substancesin accordance with the present invention. Samples 1 to 4 were fromdifferent batches of Apicera™ wax all of which had performed well in thebeehives and all of which are beeswax mimetic substances in accordancewith the present invention. The results from samples 5 to 7 are given inTable 5 and shown graphically in FIG. 4.

TABLE 4 Gas chromatography results for samples 1 to 4 Chain lengthcarbon chain sample 1 sample 2 sample 3 sample 4 Stand. group lengthrange % % % % Average Deviation 1 C20-24 1.83 3.73 4.04 2.18   3 ± 1 1.12 C25-29 17.34 16.97 17.38 18.19 17.5 ± 10 0.5 3 C30-34 41.92 36.9537.59 39.06 38.9 ± 15 2.2 4 C35-39 19.7 18.74 18.66 18.22 18.8 ± 10 0.65 C40-44 6.94 7.52 7.26 7.90 7.4 ± 4 0.4 6 C45-49 3.49 3.92 3.84 4.413.9 ± 2 0.4 7 >=C50 8.79 12.17 11.23 10.04 10.7 ± 5  1.43

Samples 5 and 6 were samples of microcrystalline wax with a slightlylower molecular weight and a slightly higher molecular distribution thanApicera™ wax, respectively. Both of these alternative waxes hadperformed very badly as foundations in the beehives. Sample 7 was anadditional check sample to confirm the results from sample 6.

An output of the gas chromatograph for sample 2 is shown in FIG. 5. Theoutputs of all samples 1 to 4 were very similar to that shown in FIG. 5.It can been seen that the trace includes a series of well spaced peaks.Generally the difference between each peak relates to the difference inchain length of the hydrocarbon of one atom. By comparison with thecalibration of FIG. 2, it can be seen that the a very large percentage(in fact it is over 98%) of the compounds of the microcrystalline waxhave a chain length range equivalent to C20 to C55. From Table 4, andFIG. 3 it can be seen that the most common (=median) equivalent chainlengths for a suitable wax lie in a range 28 to 36 atoms. The medianequivalent chain length for a suitable wax is preferably 33±4, morepreferably 31±2 atoms. The mean equivalent chain length of a suitablewax is 33±4 more preferably 33±3 and most preferably 33±2 atoms. Thesevalues are specifically useful for beehives used in mid-Europeanclimates. The present invention includes modifications to these values,either up or down, for example, to accommodate different ambienttemperature conditions, e.g. as may be experienced in the tropics or incountries closer to the poles, or as may be required to match thebeeswax of other varieties of bees. The distribution of equivalenthydrocarbon chain lengths in the preferred microcrystalline wax inaccordance with the present invention shows a generally symmetrical formabout the mean with a high molecular weight tail above an equivalentlength of C50. It is not anticipated that the minor quantities in thetail affect the performance of the wax but the present invention doesnot exclude such an effect. The molecular weight distribution of a waxwhich is a suitable for use as a beeswax mimetic substance in accordancewith the present invention may be represented by a Poisson distributionor a combination of Poisson distributions. The distribution may also lieclose to a Gaussian or a triangular distribution having a meanequivalent hydrocarbon chain length of between C30 and C38, or morepreferably with a mean of between C30.5 and C36.5 in which the standarddeviation of the distribution is between 3.5 and 6.5 carbon atoms.

TABLE 5 Gas chromatography results from wxes which were less successfulin the beehive experiments Chain length carbon chain group length rangesample 5 sample 6 sample 7 1 C20-24 1.65 5.33 5.31 2 C25-29 6.37 48.7948.71 3 C30-34 23.36 38.4 38.36 4 C35-39 42.52 6.57 6.63 5 C40-44 19.840.84 0.89 6 C45-49 5.82 0.07 0.1 7 >=C50 0.44

A notable aspect of the above results of samples 1 to 4 compared tosamples 5 to 7 in the apparent specificity of the bees to a narrowmolecular weight range of waxes suitable as beeswax mimetic substances.The differences between samples 5 to 7 and 1 to 4 are small. It is thisspecificity of the bees which has probably prevented the production of asuitable beeswax mimic up to now. However, once the teachings of thepresent invention have been understood, and in particular that asynthetic beeswax mimic is even possible, the skilled person may deviseother chemical mixtures and compounds which may act as beeswax mimics.All these modifications are included within the scope of the presentinvention as they derive from the present invention.

A more detailed analysis has been made of the beeswax mimetic substanceApicera™ using high temperature capillary gas chromatography. Thepurpose of these experiments is to identify the normal (unbranched) fromthe branched (iso-) forms of the homologous series of hydrocarbons whichmake up the microcrystaline wax Apicera™. It is assumed that because ofthe manufacturing process for microcrystalline wax as outlined above asone possible manufacturing method, the mixture of hydrocarbons includessubstantially only unsaturated hydrocarbons. The results for the totalhydrocarbon count, normal and iso- hydrocarbon forms are shown in FIGS.6A-C. FIG. 6A shows the percentage of all hydrocarbons in the mixtureagainst carbon chain length in a beeswax mimetic substance in accordancewith the present invention. FIG. 6B shows the percentage for normalhydrocarbons against carbon chain length in this mixture. FIG. 6C showsthe percentage of iso-hydrocarbons against carbon chain length in thismixture. Above a chain length of 74 atoms there may be a smallproportion of undetected ios-hydrocarbons. It is noticeable that theiso-hydrocarbon distribution has a most common chain length (34 atoms)which is higher than the normal distribution (30 atoms). The average forthe normal distribution is 29 carbon atoms, the average for the iso-formis 39 atoms and the average for the total distribution is 33 carbonatoms. All three percentage distributions approximate a Poissondistribution with λ approximately equal to the average chain length ofthe respective distribution. The normal to iso- hydrocarbon ratio isabout 60 to 40 in the mixture.

The present invention is not limited to the narrow molecular weightranges described above. In accordance with the present invention beeswaxmimics may be devised for other bee types or to work at differentambient temperatures. Hence, the present invention is not limited to thespecific materials mentioned above but includes within its scope theconcept of a synthetic beeswax mimic as such. From this concept it isexpected that families of beeswax mimics may be formed once therequirement for a specific narrow molecular weight range wax to form abeeswax mimetic substance is understood.

What is claimed is:
 1. Use of a synthetic or semi-synthetic beeswaxmimetic substance in an apiculture accessory, the mimetic substancecomprising a microcrystalline wax, said microcrystalline wax beingcharacterised in that it has a mean carbon chain length of 33±4 atoms.2. The use according to claim 1, wherein the beeswax mimetic substanceis a food grade microcrystalline wax.
 3. The use of claim 1, whereinsaid microcrystalline wax is characterised in that it has a mean carbonchain length of 33±3 atoms.
 4. The use of claim 1, wherein saidmicrocrystalline wax is characterised in that it has a mean carbon chainlength of 33±2 atoms.
 5. The use according to claim 1, wherein saidmicrocrystalline wax comprises a mixture of compounds wherein over 98%of the compounds in the mixture have a chain length range betweenC20-C50.
 6. The use according to claim 1, wherein said microcrystallinewax has a median equivalent chain length a range of 28 to 36 atoms. 7.An apiculture accessory for use in a beehive, the accessory comprising asemi-synthetic or synthetic beeswax mimetic substance, the mimeticsubstance comprising a microcrystalline wax, said microcrystalline waxbeing characterised in that it has a mean carbon chain length of 33±4atoms.
 8. The apiculture accessory according to claim 7, wherein thebees wax mimetic substance consists essentially of the microcrystallinewax.
 9. The apiculture accessory according to claim 7, wherein a virginsurface of the accessory exposed to the bees consists essentially of themicrocrystalline wax.
 10. The apiculture accessory according to claim 7,wherein the microcrystalline wax is a food grade wax.
 11. The apicultureaccessory according to claim 7, wherein the accessory is one ofartificial honeycombs, honeycomb foundations, beehive covers, beehivebottom boards, beehive queen excluders, beehive queen cages and beehivecell cups.
 12. The apiculture accessory of characterised in that saidmicrocrystalline wax has a mean carbon chain length of 33±3 atoms. 13.The apiculture accessory of claim 7, characterised in that saidmicrocrystalline wax has a mean carbon chain length of 33±2 atoms. 14.The apiculture accessory of claim 7, wherein said microcrystalline waxcomprises a mixture of compounds and over 98% of the compounds have achain length range between C20-C50.
 15. The apiculture accessory ofclaim 7, wherein said microcrystalline wax has a median equivalent chainlength in a range of 28 to 36 atoms.
 16. A method of reducing pests,disease or parasites in a beehive including at least one apicultureaccessory comprising beeswax or a beeswax mimetic substance, the methodcomprising the step of: replacing the one apiculture accessory atperiodic intervals with the same accessory made using virgin beeswaxmimetic substance, the beeswax mimetic substance comprising amicrocrystalline wax having a mean carbon chain length of 33±4 atoms.17. The method according to claim 16, wherein the beeswax mimeticsubstance consists essentially of the microcrystalline wax.
 18. Themethod of claim 16, characterised in that said microcrystalline wax hasa mean carbon chain length of 33±3 atoms.
 19. The method of claim 16,characterised in that said microcrystalline wax has a mean carbon chainlength of 33±2 atoms.
 20. The method of claim 16, wherein saidmicrocrystalline wax comprises a mixture of compounds and over 98% ofthe compounds have a chain length range between C20-C50.
 21. The methodof claim 16, wherein said microcrystalline wax has a median equivalentchain length in a range of 28 to 36 atoms.